History’s greatest rhetors are marked by their ability to sway audiences. It does not matter how great or meaningful one's message is if the individual is unable to communicate it effectively. All too often the world bears witness as the words of a genius die upon their lips, unable to gain lift at the hands of an indifferent audience. True genius comes in the form of remarkable thoughts able to be expressed by a likewise remarkable orator; one who is able to connect to the hearts and minds of thousands through mere thought-turned-expression alone. Thousands of these rhetoricians have existed throughout history, but seldom few have managed to touch the hearts of millennials quite like Fred Rogers. It is thanks to the effort of Mr. Rogers that children’s television evolved from a mindless bombardment of garish colors and sounds into educational instruction on how to process complex emotions and develop into a kind, well-rounded individual. Such accomplishment (aka the evolution of children’s television) was only able to come to fruition born out of careful dialogue presented before the United States Congress. There, on May 1, 1969, in the hallowed halls of America’s political elite, Mr. Rogers petitioned the US Senate Commerce Committee for $20 million to start a national public television broadcast to provide a meaningful educational experience for children by way of ethos, logos, and, most importantly, pathos. 

Before we can begin analyzing Mr. Rogers’ use of ethos in his 1969 address to Congress, one must first understand the three pillars of persuasion – after all, in order to craft a persuasive speech just as Fred Rogers did, one must first understand the tools they are working with. Persuasion is built upon three core tenets – or pillars – of speech: ethos, pathos, and logos. Ethos – also known as an appeal to authority, whether that authority be the speaker themselves or an outside source – is primarily concerned with establishing credibility and/or trustworthiness to an argument. Pathos (as we will cover more in-depth in the second argumentative paragraph) refers to appeals to emotion, and logos (to be covered in the third paragraph) refers to appeals to hard facts and logic. As with all tools, some strategies lend themselves more towards certain messages being argued, yet the employment of all, even at varying degrees, only serves to strengthen that speech. For example, an outside observer might think a speech aimed at reforming U.S. children’s programming (like Mr. Rogers’ speech) would best be served through pure pathos argumentation – after all, the message does center around children (the exploits and happenings of which many consider to be quite an emotional subject). However, to devoid one’s speech entirely of the other two pillars (ethos and logos) and dive wholesale into pathos in fact provides for a rather poor performance. Even as Mr. Rogers devotes the vast majority of his speech towards pathos, he still makes quite a few appeals to ethos in order to present not only his speech, but himself with an air of credibility worthy of consideration from Congress. According to Robert J. Connors’ The Differences Between Speech and Writing: Ethos, Pathos, and Logos, those who employ ethos in a verbal setting as opposed to a written one are given a unique opportunity to establish ethos, in that, “the speaker is surrounded by a far richer context for establishing the intelligence, character and good will which make up classical ethical appeal,” (285 – 286). When specifically taking into consideration Fred Rogers’ address, observers can quickly point to instances where Mr. Rogers worked ethos into his speech to establish his own credibility before the committee, with qualifiers such as, “I’ve worked in the field of childhood development for 6 years now trying to understand the inner needs of children,” (2:02). Such appeals to ethos flow phenomenally into his heartfelt speech when looking at the broader context of Mr. Rogers as an individual – for example, his social status. Regardless of how you look at it, Mr. Rogers (during the time of his speech) was a middle-class children’s television host going before Congress to as for millions of dollars to be put right back into television. He had to political capital to back his claims behind, nor economic capital to successfully lobby the government. In order to get the funding, Mr. Rogers needed to establish himself as a force to be taken seriously. How best to do this: to establish himself as an expert on children’s mental and emotional needs, and over the course of his speech, Mr. Rogers succeeds in doing just that. By establishing himself as an expert, Mr. Rogers is able to definitively say what those children’s needs are and require in order to be satiated (rather than stating mere conjecture on what $20 million towards educational entertainment perhaps could or could not do to benefit children). Such appeals to ethos implicitly petitions Congress to trust his word because of his extensive background in the matter, especially when other companies have already done the same. In the text, “We made a hundred programs for EEN, the Eastern Educational Network, and then when the money ran out, people in Boston and Pittsburgh and Chicago all came to the floor and said we've got to have more of this neighborhood expression of care,” (3:13), Mr. Rogers presents himself as not only a credible source according to these already well-established broadcasting companies, but a sound investment. Presenting himself as a sound investment is tantamount to gaining any sort of funding, which is typically where any adept speaker would transition into logos rhetoric – which, of course, is exactly what Mr. Rogers does.

Though Mr. Rogers did indeed spend the majority of his speech practicing pathetic rhetoric, he, knowing full well that at the end of the day he was still presenting to a large economic governmental body, played to his audience, choosing to back his case with definitive, hard-hitting analytical data: Mr. Rogers makes the turn to logos. Such statistical and monetary data falls into the category of logos, defined in Rachelle R. Greer’s article Reporting Results to a Skeptical Audience: A Case Study on Incorporating Persuasive Strategies in Assessment Reports as, “The communicator’s tool to prove a “truth” (or an apparent “truth”) by means of argumentation,” (579). Such “truths” are best described as collected data from reliable sources on any given subject, and most often come in the form of statistics, scientific inquiry, and research data/outcomes. During Mr. Roger’s address to the US Senate Commerce Committee, Mr. Rogers, provides necessary context for his inquiry by citing the statistics, “With [the Sears Roebuck Foundation and the National Educational Television’s] help, now our program has a budget of $6,000. It may sound like quite a difference, but $6,000 pays for less than 2 minutes of cartoons,” (1:30). Here, Mr. Rogers provides much needed context into why $20 million is the sought monetary value. By citing exactly what even a fraction of that total cost can do, Fred Rogers contextualizes the enormous request into a far more gracious light, revealing the actual reasonability of his request. Furthermore, Mr. Rogers goes on to cite the public health benefits that come as a result of healthy childhood education in the lines, “I feel that if we in public television can only make it clear that feelings are mentionable and manageable, we will have done a great service for mental health,” (4:06). Although an admittedly neglected field of scientific study during the time of Fred Rogers’ Congressional address, citing any scientific field such as mental health adds a great deal of credibility to one’s efforts, for scientific inquiry is the birthplace of logos. Even so, it is important to understand that every appeal to authority and every appeal to logic is moving towards one goal, and one goal alone: to benefit children, which is where Fred Rogers really shines in presenting his most powerful arguments. 

Just as there are some topics that fit better with ethos and others that lend themselves better towards logos, speeches surrounding public health (such as Mr. Rogers’ speech) are best suited towards pathos. Pathos are arguments that are specifically designed to “tug at the heart strings.” According to Persuasion = Stating and Arguing Claims Well by Douglas Fisher and Diane Lapp, “In order to win an argument, [a person has to appeal to] the heart by making them want to do what it is that they are persuaded to do,” (641). Such examples of “heartfelt persuasion” include charity advertisements, household pet safety, and, perhaps most impactfully, the safety of children. As individuals grow older, they tend to adopt a paternalistic/maternalistic instinct to protect those of the next generation, especially during the formative years when children lack fully-developed decision-processing centers of the brain and therefore are blind to what is “best” for them. That is where adults tend to step in and guide children towards the best possible futures, which is the entire crux of Mr. Rogers’ speech. Mr. Rogers cites in his speech from the very outset that children’s safety and education is the most important part of his speech, as well as a core tenant of his character. As Mr. Rogers says, “It’s very important to me; I care deeply about children,” (0:47). Later in his speech, Mr. Rogers, having established this deep love of and desire to foster children’s wellbeing, goes on to critique television programming perpetuated in the status quo. At nearly two minutes into his five-minute speech, Mr. Rogers, voices his concerns that as of right now, $6,000 can only afford, “2 minutes of animated… what I sometimes say bombardment. I’m very much concerned - as I know you are - about what’s being delivered to our children in this country,” (1:47). Later, Mr. Rogers goes on to explain how the lack of transparent, vulnerable emotions and meaningful discussion in children’s cartoons results in children lacking the ability to explore healthy avenues of managing emotions or articulating thoughts and ideas. Rather than delve too deeply into the harms of the status quo (which would shift the entire tone of the conversation into something far more troubling), Mr. Rogers turns the conversation back to a hopeful tone, speaking again on solutions to the problem that will be best for children. This kind of hopeful rhetoric lends itself perfectly to pathos, for hope is one of those powerful emotions that is most closely tied to the heart and, in turn, to children. By keeping the message centered around Americans’ need to protect and foster children, by the end of his five-minute speech, Mr. Rogers is able to successfully earn the $20 million dollars. 

Through the use of ethos, logos, and pathos, Fred Rogers is able to successfully petition the US Senate Commerce Committee on May 1, 1969 for $20 million to start a national public television program to benefit children’s education and mental health. Through the use of ethos, Mr. Rogers establishes himself as a credible source in the field of childhood development. Through the use of logos, Mr. Rogers is able to inform the committee on the economic benefits of a national public television program. And finally, through the use of pathos, Mr. Rogers is able to enthrall his audience with a singular promise: to better the lives of millions of children all across the country. In the time it takes a person to call a senate committee to order, Mr. Rogers managed to sway the hearts of every person on that committee, and, as a result, the hearts of millions of children, parents, and families for decades to come. 

Bibliography

Connors, Robert J. “The Differences between Speech and Writing: Ethos, Pathos, and Logos.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 30, no. 3, 1979, pp. 285–290. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/356398.

Greer, Rachelle R. “Reporting Results to a Skeptical Audience.” The American Review of Public Administration, vol. 41, no. 5, Mar. 2010, pp. 577–591. UAA Consortium Library , doi:10.1177/0275074010382183.

Lapp, Diane, and Douglas Fisher. “Persuasion = Stating and Arguing Claims Well.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, vol. 55, no. 7, 2012, pp. 641–644. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41827750.

United States. Cong. Senate. Commerce Committee. Fred Rogers Testifies before the Senate Subcommittee on Communications. May 1, 1969. 91st Cong. 1st sess. Washington: GPO, 1969 (statement of Fred Rogers, testifier, US Senate Commerce Committee). 

Reflection

Although I have studied ethos, pathos, and logos in the past, I have always been fascinated by the employment of the three pillars of persuasion, including their varying levels of success achieved by each specific orator. Mr. Rogers caught my attention in particular because, frankly put, there is no other human like him (an idea exemplified by the way he addresses those around him). He is kind, gentle, and touched the hearts of millions through his focus on childhood development and mental health. In order to study the unique manner in which Mr. Rogers spoke, I decided to pull sources from three different journals found in the UAA Consortium Library on the three pillars of persuasion (looking for key terms such as ethos, pathos, and logos). I felt the sources I chose for my paper did well to not only define ethos, pathos, and logos, but also exactly when they are most effectively employed and by whom. Upon reflection, I stand by my claim that Mr. Rogers wins his argument primarily on pathos (through particularly strong word choice, if I do say so myself), which suits him well as a hands-on expert in childhood development, as well as a television host for a children’s program. He does pathos well by pulling at the heart strings of the US Senate Commerce Committee, but he also does well playing to the interests of his audience (i.e. talking about money to an economics committee and establishing himself as a credible source to members of Congress). Due to the thoroughness of my sources and the clarity of the hearing proceedings/clarity of Mr. Roger’s arguments, I did not have a difficult time writing this paper. However, if I were to write this paper again, I think I would attempt to improve the number of sources incorporated into my paper. I think in order to maximize the type of paper I’m trying to write I would be best suited to employ 5 – 7 articles, although I did attempt to make improvements via the deletion of redundancies. 

__________________________________
KATIE BERNHARDT is a senior pursuing a Baccalaureate degree in English with a minor in Creative Writing and Spanish. This piece was selected by Professor Jennifer Stone.